What is the scientific status of the BioInitiative Report?
In science we generally differentiate between peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed publications, where the peer-review comes from independent experts in the area. The reason for this is that peer-reviewed work is only published after independent scientific peers have reviewed the work and agreed with its scientific merit, making it easier for the reader to be confident with conclusions drawn in the publication. Conversely, without independent peer review, there is far less opportunity to correct errors and ensure that the conclusions are appropriate, and thus scientists treat peer-reviewed publications as their main scientific literature source. It should be noted that this does not mean that publications lacking independent peer review are flawed (or for that matter that peer-reviewed publications are perfect), it is more that scientists would typically withhold judgment about publications until peer review has occurred. The BioInitiative Report has not undergone such independent peer
